IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/umaesp/37872.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Using Real Options to Evaluate Investments in Ethanol Facilities

Author

Listed:
  • Zou, Tianyu
  • Pederson, Glenn D.

Abstract

This paper uses real option analysis to evaluate investment decisions in ethanol facilities. First, we consider the option to expand the scale of a conventional ethanol plant. Second, we evaluate the option to choose a production technology given three drymilling choices – a conventional natural gas-fueled plant, a stover-fueled plant, and a stover-plus-syrup-fueled plant. We develop input-output coefficients and annual cash flow projections for a hypothetical small ethanol plant (50 million gallon capacity) using available industry and market price data. Scenario analysis is done to evaluate the effect of profitability and volatility on the option to expand. We find that the best decision during 2001-07 is often to expand, since the net present values of the investment project are positive. However, there are states in the binomial tree where it is best to wait. In relatively few such states the expansion project is simply rejected. During the early part of the period low profitability and high volatility more frequently favor strategies of waiting to invest until prices and profitability improve. During the latter part of the period (2005-07), profitability is sharply higher and most often the best strategy is to invest in the expansion. This result is consistent with the observed rapid increase in industry production capacity during 2005- 07. However, more recent market developments, sharply higher corn and natural gas prices and slightly higher ethanol prices during late 2007-early 2008, have combined to sharply reduce expected plant cash flow and profitability and cash flow volatility. The implication is that plant investment plans in 2008 would be increasingly placed on hold, which the real option model correctly predicts. The real option analysis of technology choice indicates that the stover-fueled technologies are most often chosen when compared to a natural gas-fueled conventional technology based on the prices that existed during 2001-2007.

Suggested Citation

  • Zou, Tianyu & Pederson, Glenn D., 2008. "Using Real Options to Evaluate Investments in Ethanol Facilities," Staff Papers 37872, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:umaesp:37872
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.37872
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/37872/files/p08-06.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.37872?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Petrolia, Daniel R., 2006. "The Economics of Harvesting and Transporting Hardwood Forest Residue for Conversion to Fuel Ethanol: A Case Study for Minnesota," Staff Papers 14020, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    2. Avinash K. Dixit & Robert S. Pindyck, 1994. "Investment under Uncertainty," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 5474.
    3. Petrolia, Daniel R., 2006. "The Economics of Harvesting and Transporting Corn Stover for Conversion to Fuel Ethanol: A Case Study for Minnesota," Staff Papers 14213, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Schmit, T.M. & J., Luo & Conrad, J.M., 2011. "Estimating the influence of U.S. ethanol policy on plant investment decisions: A real options analysis with two stochastic variables," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 1194-1205.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mooney, Daniel F. & Roberts, Roland K. & English, Burton C. & Tyler, Donald D. & Larson, James A., 2008. "Switchgrass Production in Marginal Environments: A Comparative Economic Analysis across Four West Tennessee Landscapes," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6403, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    2. Scott M. Swinton & Felix Dulys & Sarah S.H. Klammer, 2021. "Why Biomass Residue Is Not as Plentiful as It Looks: Case Study on Economic Supply of Logging Residues," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(3), pages 1003-1025, September.
    3. Brechbill, Sarah C. & Tyner, Wallace E. & Ileleji, Klein E., 2008. "The economics of biomass collection and transportation and its supply to Indiana cellulosic and electric utility facilities," Risk, Infrastructure and Industry Evolution Conference, June 24-25, 2008, Berkeley, California 48732, Farm Foundation.
    4. Lazarus, William F., 2008. "Energy Crop Production Costs and Breakeven Prices Under Minnesota Conditions," Staff Papers 45655, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    5. Eidman, Vernon R. & Petrolia, Daniel R. & Huang, Huajiang & Ramaswamy, Shri, 2009. "The Economic Feasibility of Producing Ethanol from Corn Stover and Hardwood in Minnesota," Staff Papers 47055, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    6. Luis Armando Becerra-Pérez & Luis Rincón & John A. Posada-Duque, 2022. "Logistics and Costs of Agricultural Residues for Cellulosic Ethanol Production," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-18, June.
    7. Petrolia, Daniel R., 2006. "Ethanol from Biomass: Economic and Environmental Potential of Converting Corn Stover and Hardwood Forest Residue in Minnesota," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21422, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    8. Rauh, Stefan & Berenz, Stefan & Heissenhuber, Alois, 2007. "ABSCHATZUNG DES UNTERNEHMERISCHEN RISIKOS BEIM BETRIEB EINER BIOGASANLAGE MIT HILFE DER MONTECARLO-METHODE (German)," 47th Annual Conference, Weihenstephan, Germany, September 26-28, 2007 7588, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    9. Rauh, S. & Berenz, S. & Heißenhuber, A., 2008. "Abschätzung des unternehmerischen Risikos beim Betrieb einer Biogasanlage mit Hilfe der Monte-Carlo-Methode," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 43, March.
    10. Epplin, Francis M., 2008. "Millions of acres for dedicated energy crops: farms, ranches, or plantations?," Integration of Agricultural and Energy Systems Conference, February 12-13, 2008, Atlanta, Georgia 48711, Farm Foundation.
    11. Ben Abdallah, Skander & Lasserre, Pierre, 2016. "Asset retirement with infinitely repeated alternative replacements: Harvest age and species choice in forestry," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 144-164.
    12. Ansgar Belke & Matthias Göcke & Martin Günther, 2009. "When Does It Hurt?: The Exchange Rate "Pain Threshold" for German Exports," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 943, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    13. Oscar Gutiérrez & Francisco Ruiz-Aliseda, 2011. "Real options with unknown-date events," Annals of Finance, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 171-198, May.
    14. Timothy Erickson & Toni M. Whited, 2000. "Measurement Error and the Relationship between Investment and q," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(5), pages 1027-1057, October.
    15. Sevcan Yesiltas, 2009. "Financing Constraints and Investment: The Case of Turkish Manufacturing Firms," 2009 Meeting Papers 874, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    16. T Heikkinen & K Pietola, 2006. "Rural Investment and the Cost of Income Uncertainty," ERSA conference papers ersa06p51, European Regional Science Association.
    17. Pizer, William A. & Kopp, Raymond, 2005. "Calculating the Costs of Environmental Regulation," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 25, pages 1307-1351, Elsevier.
    18. Arve, Malin & Zwart, Gijsbert, 2023. "Optimal procurement and investment in new technologies under uncertainty," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    19. Agrell, Per J. & Teusch, Jonas, 2020. "Predictability and strategic behavior under frontier regulation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    20. Shively, Gerald E., 2001. "Price thresholds, price volatility, and the private costs of investment in a developing country grain market," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 399-414, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Financial Economics; Resource /Energy Economics and Policy;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:umaesp:37872. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/daumnus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.